You are here

Editorial: Absentee Ballot Confusion Grows

The problematic intersection between the state’s new voter ID law and absentee ballots apparently has not been cleared since Attorney General Dustin McDaniel’s Feb. 10 opinion on the subject.

The new law holds that those who vote in person should show government-approved identification when they vote. If they arrive at the poll without the necessary ID, they are allowed to cast provisional ballots. If they produce ID by the Monday after the election, their ballot is “cured” and counted.

Voters who mail in absentee ballots also are supposed to provide ID by enclosing a photocopy of their driver’s license or other acceptable identification.

However, the law passed in 2013 does not explicitly state that absentee voters whose ballots are not accompanied by proof of identification are entitled to the same cure period as people who show up at the polls without photo ID.

Knowing there was a March 11 millage election for Pulaski Technical College on the horizon, the county Election Commission requested an opinion by the attorney general before the election. Mr. McDaniel opined that the law afforded absentee voters no cure period.

Then on Feb. 28, the state Board of Election Commissioners adopted an emergency rule stating that county election officials should treat absentee ballots without ID as provisional and give voters until the Monday after the election to provide identification, the same policy in place for in-person voters.

The three-person Pulaski County voted 2 to 1 not to follow the emergency rule. Pulaski County Election Commission Chairman Leonard Boyle Sr. said the board was obliged to follow the law.

“The state Board of Election Commissioners I really don’t feel like is the body to change the law. They can only make rules or promulgate rules according to what’s in the law,” Mr. Boyle said.

So now the Pulaski County Election Commission and Pulaski County Clerk Larry Crane have filed a lawsuit challenging the state board’s policy.

State board member Stuart Soffer wants the state Board of Election Commissioners to file a complaint against Mr. Boyle and Chris Burks, the other member of the Pulaski County Election Commission to vote against following the state board’s rule.

Soffer said Thursday that the commission was required to follow the rule.

“The A.G.’s opinion was an opinion. The emergency rule has the force of law,” he said.

May 20, the date of Arkansas’ primary elections and nonpartisan judicial election, is a short two months away. Election commissions across the state are watching the Pulaski County wrangling with attention and likely no small trepidation.

Does the attorney general’s opinion trump the state Board of Election Commissioners’ rule?

More importantly, how can there be consistency statewide when Pulaski County commissioners are split?

Two months is not a lot of time to resolve this issue, and it matters a great deal. We have seen too many elections decided on a single vote not to think it matters.

In the meantime, if you plan to vote by absentee ballot, make sure you know the law on providing identification. You don’t want your ballot to be at the center of the count-or-don’t-count quarrel. Make sure your vote counts.